the state did not call roy clark in this case. because roy kronk's testimony about what he did on december 11, 2008, is embellished. roy likes to spin a good yarn. but what roy said he did on sa n december 11 is impossible. we don't put him on the stand to tell you evidence in the case that isn't true. i also submit to you that roy claimed he just happened upon that scene for a second time is equally uncredible. that doesn't mean he staged the scene. what it means is that roy likes to spin a good yarn. i submit to you based on ought evidence what occurred in this case is roy found the skull as we know he did back in august. he tried to report it three times. and he got blown off. and said, to heck with it. i'm over this. maybe it really wasn't. but then he starts community quaight his son. he starts telling his son, i know where the skull is and his son is impressed. he he's trying to get this relationship back with his son. wouldn't it be great to impress my son. so he goes back to the scene. and it's still there. and roy becomes